- Darrin Paul
Discuss the idea that phenomenology and communal psychoanalysis provide both unique and useful contributions to social psychology. Illustrate your article with types of research or topics from at least two different blocks of the component.
Part 1
Within social psychology there are always a considerable variety of social subconscious perspectives that choose different theoretical frameworks in order to study how social factors and procedures influence human behaviour. This essay will concentrate on two such perspectives, phenomenology and cultural psychoanalytic by outlining their particular aims, theoretical and methodological features and the knowledge's they produce. By including research results and psychological subject areas, consideration will be given to how each perspective has inspired and expanded mental health understanding by challenging mainstream cognitive cultural experimental approaches.
The diverse origins of social psychology have led to a historical development where similar psychological processes are examined and analysed within different theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches by a diverse selection of public psychologists. Experimental sociable psychology originated in the early twentieth century from the methodical tradition which designed that certain natural laws and regulations of behavior and consciousness can be learned through scientific way of measuring and experimentation, which produces data that can be generalised and put on all people across time. The Cognitive public point of view which is the most dominant in social mindset mainly utilizes quantitative psychometric methods such as laboratory or field tests, to examine the effects that sociable stimuli exert on cognitive procedures. It adopts the ontological assumption that individuals are information control individuals whose thought techniques are shaped by the social world. The average person can be regarded as socialised thinker with limited cognitive resources and important processing biases, although it acknowledges the impact of sociable influences on the individual, these influences are considered temporary influences. Cognitive social techniques are dualistic because they view the individual as individual form their public framework, were they either have agency or are influenced by their public situation (Hollway, 2012).
Critics of cognitive social perspective would suggest its technique is more influenced by the guidelines of the scientific method, rather than the phenomena it investigates. Critical social psychologists question how complicated research inquiry can be reduced to lab founded experimentation, preferring instead to review the complexity of people experience and so this means within the context of their cultural configurations. Psychologists from the phenomenological and communal psychoanalytic perspectives struggle mainstream cognitive communal assumptions regarding ontology, strategy and the quantitative methods it adopts, preferring more naturalistic studies which employ quantitative methods to explore how knowledge is produced (Hollway, 2012).
The sociable psychoanalytic perspective is a theoretically plural self-discipline that attracts on post Freudian psychoanalysis and Kleinian object relations as well as examination and concepts from discursive mindset. What differentiates it from all other social psychology perspective's, is its fundamental assumption that individual behaviour and consciousness are largely determined by powerful conflictual unconscious motives, where composition, content and dynamics of the psyche are not always open to conscious understanding. 'The do it yourself is created both psychically and socially in powerful intersubjective relationships with others, were unconscious motives are generally in direct discord with mindful thoughts and intentions' (Hollway, 2012 p. 129). In response to the conflict provoked by unconscious stress and anxiety, latent defence mechanisms such as splitting (polarisation of good and bad), projection (the expulsion of unwanted areas of self applied) and projective recognition (id with projected elements), are employed to protect the self against unacceptable fact truths that can returning into conscious awareness. These intrapsychic defence mechanisms aren't passive but have a deep influence on the structure of the individual psychologically and socially, by inadvertently impacting their decisions, actions and interactions (Hollway, 2012).
Psychoanalytic technique adopts a qualitative and interpretative analysis, which places an emphasis on how language is employed and subjective so this means is produced. It holds the idea that the individual is never consciously alert to their motivations or this is of their actions and dialogue, therefore interpersonal psychoanalytic methods attempt to explore the individual perceptions of lived experience. Researchers seek to analyse the contradictions and conflicts that happen from unconscious wants and nervousness defences through the analytic request of splitting, projection and projective identification. By using free associated narrative interviews, participants should speak openly and widely to allow unconscious motivations to surface. Full and thorough transcripts of interviews allow research to focus on the relation between the inside world of the psyche and the subjective understanding of an individual's responses and actions in relationship their external world while others. Unlike other mental health perspectives, psychodynamics constantly places an importance on non-verbal communication and mannerisms; it uniquely provides a group of concepts for checking out an individual's idiosyncratic communication and so this means systems (Hollway, 2012).
Interpretative phenomenology has it roots in the concepts of the phenomenology beliefs of Edmund Husserl and existential philosophers such as Sarte and Merleau-Ponty, whose target centred on the nature of living and the analysis of the appearance of things or 'phenomena', in order to gain an understanding of the individual's subjective experience of the world where they can be found. The phenomenological perspective uniquely looks to examine the experience of the embodied personal with regards to other interconnected embodied individuals and the wider world most importantly. Phenomenological psychologists view the individual as devoid of any fixed key or substance, it's their actions on earth establish their being as embodied individuals with regards to others. Unlike the communal psychoanalytic perspective there is no attempt to study the psyche, target is on the subjective lived experience of 'lifeworlds', the individual's 'appearance' of things within the context of life setting. Inevitably the psyche is regularly being 'transformed out' on the earth, 'the home is consciously and actively creating indicating out of experience' (Horton-Salway 2012).
Similar to the interpersonal psychoanalytic perspective, phenomenological technique is qualitative and hermeneutic but unique in its strategy and emphasis of analysis. It seeks to get a knowledge of individual perceptions of the world by concentrating on experience and phenomena. Data is accumulated by analysing the accounts of people's 'resided experience' through interviews and first person accounts, attention is given to the precise ways people echo and experience their 'Lifeworld', by which meaning is produced. Participants are encouraged to recount every aspect however seemingly irrelevant in order that data can be systematically analysed for themes of the lifeworld and its own distinct heuristic structures that phenomenological inspection seeks to uncover. These structures are temporality (the knowledge of your energy), spatiality (the experience of space), embodiment (the experience of one's own body), intersubjectivity (the experience of human relationships with others), the goal is to explore levels of meaning by developing a thematic descriptions through the deeper degree of research (Horton-Salway 2012).
There are other key features which differentiate the phenomenological perspective from others; analysts try to be reflexive through epoche or bracketing, that involves the analyst primarily suspending their own expectations, behaviour and prejudgements of a research topic to give attention to the participants profile and understanding with a feeling of naivety. Following epoche, phenomenological lowering a methodological technique is designed to return 'things in their showing' in order to fully understand the type of the phenomena under investigation. Emphasis is on description of phenomena and the avoidance of theoretical description or interpretation in order to stay with lived experiences in the immediate and present. Hierarchies of meanings are avoided to be able to 'horizontalise' experience and treat all top features of description by identical importance and relevance. Finally verification of studies is included to allow accountability to the knowledge of the info produced and ensure that examination will not move beyond it (Horton-Salway 2012).
Both approaches talk about commonalities but have unique distinctions in conceptualisations and implicit assumptions, both provide useful resources in challenging dualistic notions of the do it yourself and society, framework and agency to provide interrogative topics. They view the home as situated and dynamically substance through our experience and the meaning that we gain. Public psychoanalytic theorists issue the notion that individuals are unitary, self covered entities individual from modern culture, they highlight the value of inter-subjective connections with others, were sophisticated unconscious dynamics drive latent motives and needs. The individual can't be separated from their communal worlds were introjected (internalised) parts of significant others and the influence of wider public morals and values are merged with ones unconscious desires and needs. Additionally phenomenological theorists concentrate on the lived and embodied experiences of people, arguing that the individual and the cultural can't be establish apart or broken down, people are always seen in relation to the world where they exist. People can not be separated from the constructs of their world, for example, body, framework, culture and time, since these constructs form conscious experience. Ultimately individuals are viewed as having self understanding and choice, these are active autonomous realtors involved in shaping their personality, rather than passive entities. Friendly psychoanalytical theorists adopt a different point of view, they suggest that anticipated to psychic determinism, were unconscious representations impact the individual's description of self, individuals therefore have less autonomy and company (Hollway, 2012).
Definitions of personal are a central subject matter within social mindset, theories produce understanding of the personal which reflects their methods and ontology basis. Hollway (2012) uses circumstance studies to emphasize how each point of view uses analysis to get distinctive understandings of how the self is composed. She cites two studies, one conducted by Simon Charles (2000, as cited in Hollway) in which he uses a phenomenological method to carry out research into working course experience and Hollway's interpersonal psychoanalytical analysis to explore the life connection with Vince in order to get a 'social psychological understanding of company' (Hollway, p. 137). Within the phenomenological review Charles's goal was to convey the impact that sociable setting has on individual thoughts, emotions and experiences and exactly how they 'have unconsciously discovered to be in the world' (Hollway, 2012). Examination provides a different rich understanding into people's situated working course experience of anguish; his transcripts communicate the rhythm, tone and feelings of conversation and dialogue, which allows him to exceed the surface interpretation of specific experience. Charles can approach the problem of class in different ways from other distanced approaches which neglect how class experience is made through a global defining context, he states 'flesh inhabiting a specific social realm' (as cited in Hollway, p. 136) to go beyond the individual-social dualism by exhibiting evidence of the lived experience of a social identification (Hollway, 2012).
Hollway and Jefferson (2012) use free association to explore Vince's firm also to gain insight into unconscious motivations that go beyond self-conscious, intentional presentations of the self applied, which challenge the social cognitive style of self applied as a logical, conscious free agent. Hollway's research shows how Vince resolves his mindful desires not through his conscious mind but by having a conflicting unconscious desire, portrayed psychosomatically through his body as symptoms. The info produced would reveal that Vince goes beyond the agency-structure dualism by displaying proof an unconscious discord that lead to a 'split between aspects of his physical and conscious intentional home' (Hollway, 2012).
To critical interpersonal psychologists meaning is paramount to people's activities in public situations not just their behaviour, concentrate should be on real life issues such as the fundamental attribution error. Mainstream cognitive interpersonal psychologists have used experimental solutions to explore how individuals feature causes of behaviour and actions to either themselves or others. Research indicate that there is a propensity to attribute others behaviour to individual dispositions alternatively than external situational factors, mainstream cognitive techniques concentrate on information handling in the individual and biases that appear to be inherent in the attribution process. Social psychoanalysis would determine such distortions or biases as defence mechanisms against anxiousness that is provoked as individuals try to effectively understand rationality and exert control over their interpersonal environment. Conversely the phenomenological point of view challenges if the error prevails, Langdridge (2012) argues that cognitive social studies have didn't consider broader communal contexts. Phenomenologist's dispute the theory that folks are distinct and self comprised units but rather integrated elements of the surroundings were the average person and the globe unfold in relation to each other, therefore it's not possible to find the causal associations of attribution. Unlike other perspectives phenomenological understanding exclusively sees the average person as a consciously embodied agent who perceives others through their senses not through cognitive functions (Langdridge, 2012).
In taking into consideration the phenomenological and psychoanalytical methods it becomes clear that every have distinctive and unique seeks, critical psychologists from each point of view seek to concern mainstream cognitive socials theories of the personal and society, framework and agency and how knowledge is produced. They both move from the individual-society dualism, though the methods they adopt are markedly different. They seek to explore the creation of signifying in everyday connections and dialogue, rather than what could be identified as man-made experimentation. Both perspectives have explored further our knowledge of self, cultural psychoanalysis looks for the hidden emotional meaning and contacts in dialogue, while phenomenologist's search below the top for this is behind experience. Through qualitative technique, researchers try to provide useful and insightful knowledge which allows us to get a wider appreciation of the mental health topics under investigation and provide solutions to issues that have a place in extending our understanding of psychology.
Word count up: 2152
References:
Hollway, W. (2012). Sociable psychology: former and present, In Hollway, W. , Lucey, H. , Phoenix, A. , and Lewis, G. (eds). Friendly Psychology Things (p. 28-54). Milton Keynes: The Open up University.
Hollway, W. (2012). Methods in public mindset, In Hollway, W. , Lucey, H. , Phoenix, A. , and Lewis, G. (eds). Public Psychology Issues (p. 60-88). Milton Keynes: The Open up University.
Hollway, W. (2012). Self applied, In Hollway, W. , Lucey, H. , Phoenix, A. , and Lewis, G. (eds). Friendly Psychology Matters (p. 120-143). Milton Keynes: The Open University.
Horton-Salway, M. (2012), DD307 Project Booklet. Milton Keynes: The Open up University.
Langdridge, D. (2012), The fundamental attribution mistake, In Langdridge, D. , Taylor, S. , Mahendran, K. , (eds). Critical readings in cultural psychology (p. 95-124). Milton Keynes: The Open up University.
Part 2
After eight weeks of frustration, brain scratching and interesting revelations I reach the finish of the course an realise that communal psychology is approximately an exploration of how our emotions and motivations develop and are managed, also how exactly we behave in sociable situations, as well as how public situations influence us. It's not simply worried about people's deeper and frequently unconscious motivations for thinking and acting in the manner that they actually, it is also concerned with a great many other phenomena. An understanding of the four main perspectives has helped to gain a much deeper knowledge and applied knowledge of lots of the psychological issues and themes; it offers helped me to map jointly in a structured way their assumptions and the technique that researchers take part in. The type of the psychological explanations and conversations have been enjoyable, different topics such specific and social selves and cultural id theory have increased my understanding of identification and group dynamics, which I feel will be of benefit when it comes to my professional medical practice as a counsellor.
At the start of the course lots of the interrogative topics and theoretical perspectives felt confusing and sophisticated but as the course progressed things became clearer plus much more cohesive. It has been an eventful and challenging quest through social mindset; I've savored the course materials but battled with some of the TMA's. Overall the course has broadened my understanding of social mindset and provided me a deeper knowledge of the difficulty of the primary theoretical debates, perspectives and arguments. Through an understanding of the critical sociable perspectives I feel I've gained an understanding of the various extents that individuals can be analyzed within there natural communal settings and the way the results provides a better knowledge of how people are relationally situated and embodied.
